I see some things I like, and dislike. I'll have to pour over that whole thing tonight.

Penalties to non-profits if illegal wheeling happens on the trails they maintain!?!!?!??!?!

Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.

I saw penalties for failure to meet DNR guideleines for trail maintenance, and mention of non-profits in that context (since many of the ORV Grant money for maintenance and improvements goes to clubs and Associations), but illegal use of state lands or state facilities will not create penalties for the organization doing the maintenance. We do the work, but we are not the law enforcement guys.

I need to back and re-read it a second time too. There were some positive things clearly stated, but some of the negative implications take a bit more work to find, like things they did not say that we were hoping they would include.

__________________
Paul - 2005 Wrangler Unlimited
KD8PAV

Last edited by phittie1100; January 26th, 2008 at 03:40 PM.
Reason: learned typing from fram_boy

I saw in the one part that they are considering making some of the "illegal" spots "legal" as to prevent spending more money on development costs. I can see where that would save loads of money. I know there huge areas in Lake county they have been fighting about for years. theres also some huge Gravel pits that are out of business that had no reclamation plans in place. they would make excelent scramble areas since the state owns most of the ground they are on.

I saw in the one part that they are considering making some of the "illegal" spots "legal" as to prevent spending more money on development costs. I can see where that would save loads of money. I know there huge areas in Lake county they have been fighting about for years. theres also some huge Gravel pits that are out of business that had no reclamation plans in place. they would make excelent scramble areas since the state owns most of the ground they are on.

After reading through that the only area that seems like a real priority is the the southeast michigan area and then the following just seems like vague standards for the rest of us. Although an ORV badge that identifies your vehicle seems like it sucks I suppose it would only bother ya if you were doing wrong. Also mentioned was an increased cost on illegal ORV riding ticket penalties. Maybe this was pushed under the rug or I'm confusing this with state land which is a huge chunk of where we ride up here but the penalties have been a hell of alot harsher than just a fine. For that matter how does someone in my area do anything to help where they decide to expand riding area. I'm pretty virgin to the politics of it all so I may be saying some stupid stuff but that's just my two cents.

If I read that correctly it sounds like the state is trying to push opening parks like the mounds off on local governments or private land owners.....anyone else get that impression while reading that section.

If I read that correctly it sounds like the state is trying to push opening parks like the mounds off on local governments or private land owners.....anyone else get that impression while reading that section.

yeah.. but maybe it's a good thing. i think we all know the non-profits and local gov's and such would run things better than paper pushers in lansing that don't have a clue. i think there are alot of orgs that would be more than happy to step up and take the reins on getting access to off-road opportunites.

i also saw it directed heavily at SE mich... but ya gotta start somewhere i guess.

First thing: Pat thanks for posting the link. I printed off and read the proposal. It is very interesting. The proposal is very much like the "Hatfield-McCoy" trail system plan in West Virginia. go to www.trailsheaven.com to see the system maps and information.
Their system is on quite a bit of private lands but the State pased laws naming owners not liable for injuries / damage on the trail system.
Take a moment and review their plan from the web site. The state of WV has experienced quite a finincial benifit from the trial system. This type of information could be of use during negoations with local governmental bodies interested in participating in trail expansion.

this may be the wrong place to put this . I personally think it would be great to get a trail from south east and from south west michigan that meets like in jackson and then goes north to mackinaw. It would make good two tracking and get more families involved just a idea

I like that they mentioned several times the need for more mounds type areas in the SE. Sounds promising as does the 25% proposed expansion of the ORV trails.

I liked this idea as well. I'm new to off roading and liked the idea that there is a place to do it. Where the trails have a known condition. Don't get me wrong it's fun to explore, however getting your truck stuck axles deep is no fun.Iif you didn't expect it and was not prepared.

if they were to open a off road park couldn't they charge to use it on top of the sticker that you have to buy? If you go to bald mountain they charge you to part if you dont have a state sticker and then they charge to use the range

I would see this as a win win The money would be used to maintain the parks and we would be happy to have a few parks to use Charge like $5 or $10 to use the park, I think that would be fair

What liability insurance program does the state run that this type of trail system is welcomed by some private land owners?

I only ask this because a private land owner that allows the snowmobile trail to go through his land will not allow me to make a trail for 4x4's on his land. Not because he is afraid of the usage or damage, but he is afraid of being sued. What covers the liabiliy on the snowmobile trail?

What liability insurance program does the state run that this type of trail system is welcomed by some private land owners?

I only ask this because a private land owner that allows the snowmobile trail to go through his land will not allow me to make a trail for 4x4's on his land. Not because he is afraid of the usage or damage, but he is afraid of being sued. What covers the liabiliy on the snowmobile trail?

If the land owner accepts $$ for the use of the easement, he accepts all liability for the trail. IF the landowner DONATES the use of the trail, he also DONATES the liability to the organization maintaining the easement.

Since I am completely new to off-roading, I personally can't see anything wrong about the drafted document except for that fact that they are not pushing for trail development in the South-west area of Michigan. Trails are just as scarce over here the only difference is that on the west side we have more undeveloped land that could be negotiated for. I almost always have to drive over towards Detroit for everything weather it is off-roading or auto shows during the summer.

I am hoping they really step-up and open a new ORV place in SE Michigan. I like the mounds but it would be nice to try some place new without driving to the Higgins Lake area. Im guessing they are trying to develope SE MI first mainly do to the lager population over here. It would be nice to see a truck friendly tail from SE to SW and then to the north, like mentioned above.

If they go thought with a trail in SE I know me and a few buddies would be willing to pitch in a hand at cleanup and maintaining the trails if an organization set-up a clean-up weekend.

I think volenter work and non-profit organizations are going to play a big role in whatever the state desides.

I'm not done reading this yet, but do they cover (directly) the powerlines that used to be used by most off roading people (back in the 70's). Those were great trails.

Did they cover vehicle specifications at all? I was just past the enduro motorcycle part in my reading.

Does Greatlakes4x4.com have a unified voice, or is this just a website. It seems like more, but I'm still relatively new to the site. I'd be happy to volunteer as a helper at any event in SW lower Michigan. Clean-up or whatever.